The Numbers
A Run at the Latest Data from ABC's Poobah of Polling, Gary Langer
Gary Langer is director of polling at ABC News, where he's covered the beat of public opinion for nearly 20 years - conducting and analyzing ABC News polls, evaluating data from other sources and setting the news division's standards for poll reporting. Langer has won two Emmy awards for ABC's reporting of public opinion polls in Iraq, and The Numbers blog was honored this year as winner of the 2008 Iowa Gallup Award for Excellent Journalism Using Polls.
ARCHIVES
SUBJECT INDEX
RECENT POSTS
- In Afghanistan Decision, Risks Abound
- Views on the Terror Trials
- Sarah Palin: Rogue for President?
- Chasing Feathers
- Tomorrow's Elections: An Obama Referendum?
- Schwarzenegger's Nastygram: One in 10 Billion?
- Executive Pay? Cut Away
- Pols, Polls and Pushback
- On Nuclear Iran, Diplomacy and Sanctions are Preferred to Hostilities
- Polling, Politics and Nobels
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama and Working-Class Whites
May 13, 2008 12:42 PM
The anticipated outcome of today’s contest in West Virginia is prompting a fresh review of Barack Obama’s difficulties winning support from working-class white voters in this year’s Democratic primaries. One question: The extent to which it does or doesn’t predict problems for Obama if he’s the party’s nominee in November.
The effect, which we started reporting back in February, has been clear in the primaries: Whites who don’t have a college degree have voted for Hillary Clinton by a 2-1 margin, 62-31 percent, while those who’ve gone through college have divided evenly, 48-47 percent.
It seems that the effect stems in part from the thematic positioning of the two, with Clinton’s more nuts-and-bolts approach better attuned to the working class, Obama’s inspirational pitch for a new politics resounding better among more upscale Democrats. Obama’s been helped by the fact that better-educated voters are disproportionately likely to turn out – especially in primaries.
But primaries only tell us so much about general elections. In our latest ABC/Post poll, testing each of the Democrats against John McCain, there’s a shortfall among less-educated whites for both: McCain leads Obama by 12 points in this group, Clinton by 8.
Obama, with his upscale appeal, does better among better-educated whites: McCain’s just +3 vs. Obama, compared with McCain’s 12-point advantage against Clinton among college-educated whites. That accounts for Obama’s better showing against McCain overall, 51-44 percent in our poll, vs. 49-46 percent in a Clinton-McCain matchup.
Obama McCain Clinton McCain
Whites, no college 40% 52 44% 52
Whites, college grads 47 50 42 54
There are other potential impacts of race and socioeconomic status. As we noted in our poll analysis yesterday, 17 percent of less-educated whites say they’re at least somewhat uncomfortable with the idea of an African-American president; among better-educated whites that declines to 4 percent. As noted, there’s a similar effect on comfort with a woman president – and McCain’s age is a far bigger negative than either of these. Each of the candidates has room for some consciousness-raising on these concerns.
It’s also worth noting that the latte-vs.-lunch bucket effect has not been entirely consistent in all primaries this year. Obama won less-educated whites in the Vermont and Wisconsin primaries, was +2 in Utah and came within 4 points in his home state of Illinois (although in each he again did better with upscale whites).
It’s fair for the Obama camp to point out that he doesn’t do significantly worse against McCain among working-class whites than Clinton does, and that he does better with their upscale counterparts. And Obama’s numbers are nothing like John Kerry’s and Al Gore’s; they lost working-class whites to George W. Bush by 24 points and 17 points, respectively.
But working-class whites nonetheless are a group with which Obama might well like to improve. If he loses today’s primary, and next week’s in Kentucky, they’ll be the first place to look. And less-educated voters account for a greater share of the turnout in general elections than in primaries. While Obama could win a general election without them – just as he leads McCain today – it’s also true that the last Democrat to capture the White House, Bill Clinton, ran evenly among working-class whites as he did so.
May 13, 2008 in 2008 Primaries, Race | Permalink | User Comments (126)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The best thing you can do for any human being is to teach them to fish. You don't give them a fish so they can eat for a day. You teach them to fish so they can eat for a lifetime. Teaching black children that white people are in control of their lives is child abuse, and if you are guilty of it, S-T-O-P it.
Posted by: Kitty | May 13, 2008 1:37:52 PM
I don't understand this argument about Obama not being able to pull the working class white vote --- the vast majority of the working class is WHITE! If Obama can't attract that particular group of voters, then somebody PLEASE explain to me how the hell he's ahead of Hillary Clinton!!! Black people only make up 10-12% of the total population.... he will NOT win the White House without the "working-class white vote." Just like Hillary will NOT win without black votes.... this fighting among democrats MUST stop if the old fart John McCain is to be sent back to his rocking chair in November!
Posted by: stop the madness | May 13, 2008 1:38:50 PM
What about the blacks just voting for BHO because he is black regardless if they are educated or not. BHO does nothing to endear himself to the middle class white. He seems to think he is hip with them by playing a game of pool or bowling and drinking beer. Unfortunately for him the uneducated are just not that dumb.
Posted by: rockthebleachers | May 13, 2008 1:39:01 PM
Obama does well with College educated whites because he sounds like a professor and reminds them of college days. ha ha ha
Posted by: justme2see | May 13, 2008 1:39:25 PM
Not surprised that Obama has trouble getting uneducated (not less educated) white voters in KY and WV to vote for him , afterall most people (not all) out there are so far removed from the real world.. Maybe someone should tell them that America is a country of many races and colors and that the white race (of which I am one) will soon be minority. That realy pleases me , because maybe one day we will not have a "STUPID WHITE MAN " running this country .
hvdk
Posted by: hvdk54 | May 13, 2008 1:39:54 PM
Thank God everyone only gets one vote.
Posted by: Kitty | May 13, 2008 1:42:37 PM
i am southern, white, educated (i teach on both the high school and college levels) and i earn more than $50,000; a yellow dog democrat, i cannot relate to obama; his church's theology is antiwhite; his wife's comments are nothing i want to hear from a potential first lady; his association with 1960s terrorists is problematic; he is not small town america; he is not the silent majority that elected Nixon nor the blue dog democrats that elected Reagan. count my words, most of us in middle america will have no choice but to vote for McCain.
Posted by: ron | May 13, 2008 1:43:57 PM
I need to express this because I find what so many Obama supporters state to be patently offensive and insulting in the extreme. So many of you feel "whites" in WV and KY are uneducated, racist and thus should be thrown away because, as one poster here says, "Working class whites? How polite. This term refers to uneducated Americans who could not even point out the capital of Canada. Racism runts rampant in this group. Is it any surprise that they refuse to vote for a man of mixed race? Are THESE the people the nation should defer to when considering ANYTHING of national importance? Please." THIS is the reason I am learning to despise the Democratic party and all it no longer stands for. To be clear, I am YOUNG, BIRACIAL, HAVE TWO POST-GRAD DEGREES AND MAKE MORE THAN 50k and yes I do drink lattes. HOWEVER, I would not ever demean an entire state, or two, with this type of sweeping generalization. Let us not forget that the "latte liberals" who post here seem to be clinging to their belief in their own form of clinging to their religion aka "If you don't think as we do you're racist, uneducated, fill in the blank with the appropriate insult." I'd like to ask any of these posters if you've been to WV and KY and interviewed a majority of its populace. As far as KY being a bastion for racisom, it is obvious this poster makes no mention of the ATL and the Humana Festival for the Arts, one of the most prestigious artistic venues, and events, in this country. I think, and this is my own opinion, that the very categorization of "uneducated whites" or "blacks" is a facile reduction of an entire group of people. You are assuming a normative "Uneducated working class white" and how insulting is it to use the contrast latte vs lunch pail. Why don't you stick a hayseed in the white guy's mouth and have him say his sister is his mother?! I wonder how these people would react if we had an "uneducated black worker" category, which seems to be missing, and rightly so, for categories, while perhaps interesting when attempting to read a crystal ball, are offensive in that they create an amorphous stereotype in which people lock others away and dispose of them and devalue them. IF Obama were such a uniter, I would have expected him to lash out against this type of rhetoric. He hasn't said a word. This leads me to believe that he himself gobbles up these stereotypes. Since when is it a crime to be "working class?" Since so many Democrats like Huffington, who married a gay man and divorced him for his money btw, says it is. And it is mainly from what I perceive as a loss of control over "the other" as Obama said in his San Francisco speech. The Democratic party is neither. When Obama won Iowa, state one, Clinton was told to step down, that it was over, and it's been ongoing. Suppose the same had been said about Obama when she was leading? We'd be branded racists and our lattes would be served luke warm under the glares of our once peers. The Dem party is filled with hypocrites, and I, for one, find it a huge relief to leave this "party." Will I return? With Dean, Pelosi, Kennedy, Richardson in power, I doubt it. The "old boy" network and caustic arrogant members who support them (the negative anti0WV and KY posters for example) have given me the choice to walk away or be a part of the exclusionaly and elitist Obama Express. I choose the former, and odd -- I did like the Obama Express in the very beginning. I'm no longer under his spell, and I am DemNoMore.
Posted by: DemNoMore | May 13, 2008 1:47:13 PM
Good Post Vickie...........Maybe if he told us stupid white folks what he was going to do to make this country better we would vote for him.
Posted by: Barb | May 13, 2008 1:47:13 PM
Obama is all puff and no substance. He's scary as there are too many hidden issues with this politician. I'm voting for anyone but Obama.
Master's Educated Asian Woman
Posted by: darsaw | May 13, 2008 1:48:46 PM
White, less educated voters do not buy Obama's load of crap. He is not sincere or respectful when he talks of this demographic. That can't be denied. He has done nothing to make himself seem like he would be a president that would work hard on behalf of them, for their issues.
That is why he can't win their vote.
Posted by: Eugene | May 13, 2008 1:51:02 PM
Excellent post, DemNoMore!!
Posted by: AC_83 | May 13, 2008 1:52:05 PM
So 90% of the black vote for Bill Clinton is because he's such a great guy. But when it's for Obama it's because they're all racist. Right.
Posted by: kay kay | May 13, 2008 1:54:12 PM
Like Ray Nagin wasn't going to back BHO. Remember he likes chocolate.
Posted by: rockthebleachers | May 13, 2008 1:56:23 PM
How anyone can honestly believe Obama is a change from the same old political games is beyond me. He said his association with Rezko was a 'dumb' decision, that he didn't know Wright was a rascist, that he wasn't putting down small town workers, that he wants a bipartisan administration.He was voted "Most Liberal Senator" title last year, he wants gun controls, made a deal with Rezko even while knowing Rezko was under investigation for corruption,lied about not knowing Wright's agenda, and told a liberal San Francisco audience what they wanted to hear about rural 'hicks'. He told Judicial Watch he had no records from his term in the Illinois legislature and is using a Madison Avenue slogan 'Change We Can believe In' to try to get in the White House. He comes from a wealthy Hawaiian family even though he tries to portray himself as one of the downtrodden. 100 years ago he would have been called a snake oil salesman.
Posted by: hvdk54 | May 13, 2008 1:57:32 PM
In case you haven't noticed, millions of people are not voting for Obama. It might seem like a laughing matter if Hillary were not running a very close second. But to laugh over 4 S/Ds when Hillary has approximately half the vote needed for your candidate to win is soooooooooo childish. Foolish, too. Your candidate needs those people to vote for him. You'd better hope all your laughing doesn't create a REVENGE VOTE FOR MCCAIN.
Posted by: Kitty | May 13, 2008 1:59:53 PM
I'm not worried about a white DEM in office. I'm worried about a DEM in office. lol
Posted by: Kitty | May 13, 2008 2:04:37 PM
Dukakis LOST 45 states in '88.
Obama will lose even more.
Disaster for the democrats in
november.They may lose the house and the senate.
Dean,Pelosi,Kennedy,Kerry,and the rest
of the group betting on a dead horse.
I'm white middle class educated and i will never vote for Obama.
Posted by: Nicholas | May 13, 2008 2:07:50 PM
Believe it or not, there are people who will NOT vote for Obama because he is a Democrat. Well, that and his America-hating wife. Oh, and his pastor does ruffle some feathers. And the siding with the muslim thing he wrote about in his book. And ... well, you know the rest of the stuff that has to do with his being a DEM. That's the way they roll ya know?
Posted by: Kitty | May 13, 2008 2:08:23 PM
WHEN ASKED
Which should be more important in choosing a party's nominee for president?
Delegate count OR Popular vote - 80% Said Popular vote
And
Obama and his supporters said the Superdelegates should not go against the WILL OF THE PEOPLE well the popular vote is the WILL OF THE PEOPLE
Posted by: truth | May 13, 2008 2:09:06 PM
Post a comment
